When you only need notifications, and some music control, it works really well.
I have most features enabled though, using it as "just a watch" (which is what the tunable battery saver mode is, which I used a fee times in a bind) it turns 2d remaining into 1w+, so I would not be surprised if it would turn the 20-25d into 50-75d ballpark, possibly more.
Instinct Solar and Crossover Solar seem to give the above a run with much longer times, a friend is getting a Crossover this month because of that. Unfortunately if the claim is true he's not going to be able to report success for a looong time...
I love my Withings. Given what I've read about the Fossil application experience, I assume Withings is better in that regard too.
I got a basic Amazfit model now, besides time, I only care about SMS notifications and having it vibrate on calls.
A single charge lasts around a month.
How did you hack the BIP, and what did you do with it then?
The device is safe since on iOS I restrict the Zepp app from any internet, but you need to refresh your GPS with the app. On Android it's much safer with something like gadgetbridge.
I have been hoping that fossil (whose watch I didn’t pick originally because I found the interface sluggish, text hard to read, and light difficult to trigger) would release an updated model that would be my next watch. Pretty bummed to see this news.
They should have leaned in to it and made the Versa the equivalent Pixel Watch "a" series. Instead we have nothing good left.
casio?
Or any smartwatch with a long lasting display that only needs charging every month, like the Fossil hybrid ones did.
1: https://www.skagen.com/en-us/smartwatches/learn-more/gen-6-h...
I bought Bip in 2018. I bought a $20 used Bip Lite as replacement in 2020 after Bip failed because of a known issue with the case's glue (fixed in later models), since I always run with my phone so don't need Bip's own GPS.
They've got models with various kinds of displays, from transflective outdoor usable ones to the usual OLED.
Battery life on the non-OLED models can be very good too, especially on the solar ones, a month or more in most cases.
And as far as I can tell their app needs internet to sync data from the watch even though it's connected via bluetooth, I assume it's uploading to their servers for processing before viewing in app.
Other than that it works great, I have no complaints about my Venu 2.
It's among the few hybrids that look like a proper, stylish watch; I compared it with hybrids from Garmin and some other leading brands, and Withings was without doubt the one with the best construction quality and aesthetics. (I didn't consider Fossil, not sure why.) Garmin's models are mostly plastic, but even the higher-end models have a kind of cheap look to them.
[1] https://support.withings.com/hc/en-us/articles/1853769342926...
thx anyways
I'm ready to ditch Fitbit as Google seems to be doing everything they can to kill it. They bricked a bunch of devices and told everyone to just buy a new one.
But it's frustrating that so many companies insist on the huge traditional size watch faces. I don't need or want the time or apps on my wrist, just the health features. All the competitors to Fitbit, especially Garmin, seem to be having their own competition of who can make the ugliest device that they can convince people to buy.
The hardware (at least gen 1) has around a 1 year lifespan due to the quality of the seals. You can only get a warranty replacement once. Mine literally fell apart once when I put it on, then the other one was shorting out in the case.
They don’t allow heart rate sharing over Bluetooth. Kind of a niche feature but this stops you from using it as a heart rate monitor with a bike computer or other exercise equipment.
In the end, after the support refused to service my watch for a warranty repair, I just switched to a Garmin Venu 3S, which I like, but I do miss that semi-analogue design.
Why is this an issue? I have an Apple Watch and Every night when i take it off I put it in the charger. At this point it would be more confusing if I only needed to do this every other or every third day.
My old Amazfit bip seems like it may give up on me any time now.. but I still can't find something that comes close to this in terms of it's 4 week battery life. Not even fitness trackers.
I already have to charge my laptop, smartphone, steam deck daily. If i have to add earphones and smart watch to that list, it would be just too much for me.
> Its also pretty ugly.
Subjective obviously but I quite like how they look.
And if I'm out somewhere and don't have my watch charger handy, I can stick it on the back of my phone and charge it from that.
It's not that difficult to produce a smart watch that can keep a battery for a week so I don't understand why you feel the need to condition people to get used to the horrible battery lives of popular watches as if it's the only way.
I'm a big fan of Garmin's hybrid watches that are smart "enough" but provide a 9 day battery life. Recently, Mobvoi made it possible to have an Android Wear smart watch with a multi-day battery (TicWatch). Something that Google Pixel will have you think to be impossible.
My only day to day upgrade with apple watch, is it allowed me to stream music to my airpods on a run without my phone. But I think Garmin has since released phones that can store music..
I'm not using my apple watch to run "apps" past podcast/music/running tracking.
I did always try to get a morning bowel movement before starting my runs though.
Real reason I got my forerunner though is for backpacking and skiing, so conditions where I’ll be in extreme temperatures batteries don’t like, without cell phone service, without power overnight, and potentially needing to navigate on offline maps. I know this doesn’t reflect the average buyer though.
Amazfit, Xiamoni, Pautios, etc. There's a flood of competitors on Amazon selling the functionality you describe at a price level that makes it non-worthwhile for the "name" brands. That's why those famous brands exit the space.
There are two leagues of "smart" watches. At the high-end, "cell phone on your wrist" tier, there's Apple and just enough smaller players to keep Apple somewhat honest. It's really more fashion accessory than practical device.
At the basic "pedometer, Bluetooth notifications from my phone, and week-long battery" tier, there are tons of options. But margins are razor thin, so the cool names don't play in that space. Down here you're talking about a purely utilitarian device rather than a fashion accessory.
Another way of saying "paying for a name" is "paying for trust". When you run notifications through a smart watch you give it a lot of sensitive information. For example the contents of texts you receive. Depending on the device/implementation it can be a lot more. If it manages this data via a companion app then it's pretty easy for it to phone home too.
I don't turn notifications on my watch, I'm distracted enough as is, but if I did I'd be careful about the device I use. I suspect some of those bottom of the barrel devices aren't treating this sensitive level of access with the upmost care.
For those running, I can see it being useful as well. GPS for tracking the morning run, with zero need to carry your heavy phone with you. And (talking about apple watch specifically, as that’s the one I have experience with), you can even connect your wireless headphones directly and listen to music too without needing a phone.
so honest they use unlicensed tech?
I have simply used the watch since the day I bought it. took it out of the box, put it on my wrist.
I've kept track of my SLEEP, my hiking or running, I've acclimatized to the mountains, I can check my resting heart rate, number of steps, maps, sunrise/sunset, respiration, stress, pulseox, etc..
It is not uploading my sexual activity. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37514355
I've never put it online, connected it to my phone or anything else. I've never had to create an account or upload anything.
I put it on the charger when I jump in the shower and that is all I need. A charge lasts 5-6 days.
It does what I want it to do and it doesn't do anything I don't want it to do.
I bought a watch for myself, my parents and my girlfriend. The prompting and social aspects of the “close your rings” exercise tracking have already led to a ~10 bpm decrease in my girlfriend’s resting heart rate, suggesting a marked improvement in her cardiovascular health.
Personally, I find the Apple Watch somewhat ugly, but the fitness features are worth the sartorial limitations!
The sensors in Garmin, Suunto, Samsung, and many others are equally as good, plus Garmin and Suunto have significantly better battery life than Apple too.
Why do people pay for The North Face, when you can have knock-off brands for 1/5th the price?
Part of it is paying for better quality assurance, more predictable and coherent UX, and so on. But a big part is that yeah, this day and age, watches are fashion / status accessories. They do nothing your phone can't. That doesn't mean they have no value to the buyers: the continued popularity of pricey mechanical watches is proof that there's more to this story.
The problem is that smartwatches never really positioned themselves as particularly... interesting. They don't signal social status, they aren't pretty, they don't do anything mind-blowing. They're just somewhat cheap-looking and oversized black slabs that display messages from your phone, clumsily.
So far, the closest to a "killer" application for the tech is trying to gamify everyday activities by tracking steps, sleep patterns, or heart rate. But how many people stay fixated on this and really keep it up in the long haul? As for the fashion part... there's only so much mileage you can get out of the ability to change wallpapers or bands.
- Send and respond to messages.
- Set timers.
- Set reminders.
This is far easier than getting out a phone and trying to type on a horrid touchscreen keyboard.
Paying for things and timing runs are also useful. The Apple Watch does all these things adequately, though I don't like using an iPhone.
Huh? The simple fitness tracker watches track your heart rate, sleep quality, step count, etc. Your phone can't do any of that stuff; you need something attached to your body for those measurements.
>So far, the closest to a "killer" application for the tech is trying to gamify everyday activities by tracking steps, sleep patterns, or heart rate.
So you just contradicted your earlier statement.
>As for the fashion part...
My cheap Amazfit fitness tracker is not fashionable at all: it's very boring looking, and no new band is going to change that.
For some people, overpriced watches might be a fashion symbol, but for others (esp. anyone spending less than $75) they're really not.
How do you know that it is «only»? The BOM alone is likely to exceed that for a not very smart watch. There is no «only», as there are other costs of running a smartwatch business:
– The cost of engineering the bloody thing: you have to pay salaries to engineers. Smartwatch engineering is a niche skill and not every engineer is capable of creating a good smartwatch design.
– The BOM itself: engineering decisions will affect the BOM. Sacrifices might have to be made, which has a risk of the final product becoming less reliable or less clamourable to consumers.
– Supply chain management: the cost of a stable supply chain might fluctuate but the supply will be stable. A supplier might be cheaper but flaky which means unexpected repurcussions for the production line; for example, components becoming unavailable and requiring re-engineering thusly.
– Integration with smartphones: most users expect a smartphone app, which means actually 2x apps (Android and iOS), which means salaried mobile app developers. Apps require on-going support, so it will become an ongoing expense. If you handwaive the smartphone apps as a nuisance, the watch might be not as appealing to consumers.
– Scale: for the product to be sustainable, it has to be produced in significant numbers. The manufacturing line is unlikely to agree to produce the product in the quantity of, say, 1k units either.
– Quality assurance: customers will abuse the product. So it will have to be tested within a particularly defined framework to reduce the number of support incidents. QA costs money, too.
– Marketing: customers have to discover the product before it can be sold to them and know why they should want this product and not a competitor's. Marketing is not free, even if it is one man show. If the customers can't discover the product, revenue will be zero or close to zero.
– Distribution network: resellers will take a cut from each watch sold which will have to factored into a unit's price. Direct distribution channels can do away with that, but you will have to negotiate contracts with postal and courier services to get the preferential pricing, or pass the cost onto the customer (not every customer likes high shipping costs), procure quality shipping packaging in numbers (the smartwatch is fragile) and be prepared to run to the post office yourself, like, daily.
– Support: stuff breaks. So you will have to commit to and support the product, and support is not free. Customers will come back to you with all sorts unusual problems and sometimes with zany requests. No or poor support, a backlash from customers and alike will not be conducive to the overall success of the enterprise.
– Costs of running the business: accountant(s), sundries, plus your own salary.
– Taxation: the government in your local jurisdiction will send a tax man to you to get a slice.
– Most importantly: profit. Sustainable profit from each unit sold also has to be factored into the price. The product has to become profitable at some point otherwise it will tank and vanish before it reaches v2.
That is a very, very high level breakdown of things that are just on the surface, and there are many nuances and unexpected expenses. All of that defines the cost of a single unit.
At the $50 price point it is unlikely to become a successful smartwatch product.
(1) I see a myriad of products on Amazon fitting the description that parent comment was talking about, the average retail prices being sub-$50.
(2) We are literally conversing in the comments of a post about name brands withdrawing from this space. Because below the Apple level, margins are too thin.
- Feature parity (hardware and software).
- Build quality (again, hardware, software and materials used in the making).
- Overall quality (will it die in 3 days, in 3 months or will last).
- Support (branded products are sold through local reseller channels and are subject to the local consumer protection laws – if it dies 1 month later, can it be fixed or replaced?)
I did have a quick look at the latest Fossil watch product before chiming in, and their watch seemed like a very sophisticated and polished product. I still have my doubts that there is a $50 functional and quality counterpart to it.
2. Apple has taken up the upper end of the niche for a reason – they have an ecosystem that their watch products weave into seamlessly. Their watch can even be used to unlock a MacBook in the direct proximity of it – it is a bonus feature, unrelated to the watch functionality itself but is possible because of the ecosystem.
Non-Apple products would always remain 2nd class citizens on the Apple platform due to having to interoperate with someone else's platform by virtue of being a standalone watch product and not part of their own ecosystem.
Even if the Apple ecosystem was entirely unlocked and open to third party watch products, the competing watch products would still always lag behind due to having to constantly playing a catch-up with new platform features.
I know it's a small thing, but I have to wake up early several days a month to perform a production health check at work, and I love the smooth integration:
1. Roll out of bed
2. Put on my Apple Watch
3. Unlock my iPhone with FaceID as I'm walking to my laptop
4. My iPhone unlocks my Watch by the time I get there
5. I tap a key on my keyboard, and my Watch unlocks my laptop
Unfortunately that smooth integration comes to a crashing halt when I have to log into my work VDI, but the Apple ecosystem is a very warm, welcoming place.
Do remember that I'm replying to a parent comment looking for "a simple watch with simple features". The watches that I'm referring to are basically pedometers and sleep trackers, with Bluetooth notifications from your phone. Of course it's possible to get week+ battery life with that feature set, even with a nice-looking AMOLED display. If you're willing to settle for an TFT-LCD display (I don't recommend it), then you can get nearly a month.
Then additional replies come along, saying, "Oh, but ---I--- need independent on-board GPS and waterproofing to two leagues of depth for my SCUBA hobby, notifications that never ever glitch, and I want a privacy audit trail for all of my super-secret data about how many steps I take per day". Well, okay. Maybe just buy an Apple Watch then? It all depends on your definition of a "smart watch", but I am discussing how I believe that parent commenter and myself define it. If you're incredulous that week+ battery life is ubiquitous in this range, then we may be thinking about completely different things.
What is your current watch? Curious about what model I could confidently recommend to people who have the battery problem.
Honestly, my favorite watch over the past 5-10 years has been a no-name that shows up on Amazon with a search for "EURANS Smart Watch 44mm, AMOLED Fitness Watch". $20, today. Since it uses standard watch bands, it was easy to find an inexpensive steel upgrade band. The phone app for managing this watch is the best I've used, and there were enough decent-looking watch faces available to make me happy. Battery lasts 12+ days.
Unfortunately, I found that with the EURANS, Bluetooth notifications on my phone were sometimes flaky. With Amazfit, notifications are solid, but sometimes syncing steps from the native app to Apple Health can be flaky. In the ultra low-end range, you're going to deal with something, but for me the Apple Health stuff is easier fix with the occasional manual edit.
It’s one of the most practical devices I own but I hadnt considered it a fashion accessory. Nobody who sees my watch thinks that, in fact most think the opposite but I’m ok with it cause I didn't get it to serve that purpose.
Maybe it’s because I own the poor version with a plain black sports band. Maybe if I owned a prettier one I’d get more compliments. However I have real watches when I need something like that which I think look much nicer if I’m going to dress up etc.
edit
To be fair I’m the furthest thing from fashionable and always have been so…I’m probably not the best judge of these things I suppose.
Have a look at Pinetime. It won't be discontinued, since it's an open-source smart watch.
Then you could upvote me to put my comment at a higher position.
But yes to epaper screen and programmable buttons would be nice. Pebble was 10 years ago, I thought we'd be at commodity F91W smartwatch hardware by now. And TBF $50 fitness trackers are close.
What is Fossil's identity ?
The reason I'm making this distinction is because at face value, any fitness tracker will do. They display the timme/date, have many extra simple features, and they last 10/14 days.
If one wants something more watch-looking, there are small/budget smartwatches, that are essentially fitness trackers with a larger screen (and in some cases, a GPS).
The problem is actually the apps, which are terrible and/or aggressive. Huawei display ads, and very weaselly, they introduce a small delay, so that one can easily click on them by accident; also, for some models, the app is not provided on Google Play (!). Most, possibly all, apps keep warning the user about giving location permissions, even if one doesn't care.
Besides very special cases (solar-powered, battery-powered etc.), the smartwatch with the longest battery life was the Amazfit Bip, but it was really, really terrible.
Any operation connecting the app to the phone requires syncing first, which takes an inordinate amoujnt of time (I don't have the Bip anymore, but I think it was a minute or so). On top of that, if the app has been recently updated, the AGPS will need to be resynced, which AFAIR, takes a few minutes.
Zepp sucks in this department. Modern Amazfit smartwatches still take a disproportionate time (compared to the competitors) to sync, but at least they do it asynchronously.
To be fair, my list of necessary features was very short: - display the time - display mobile notifications - display weather
All I want is a simple watch with simple features that doesn't require charging every day. Their hybrid line with some sort of e-ink (like) display really is perfect to me.